August 25, 2011

"... either a) being able to produce human-ovum-fertilizing substances or else b) deciding that your genitals either are or ought to be male, what is there, exactly, that makes Rick Perry more 'manly' than Bruce Springsteen, or Conan O’Brien, or the late Fred Rogers, or for that matter the female-bodied but impeccably masculine Sinclair Sexsmith?"
A question has been posed!

Being a good man, includes being a mensch. Oh. And, Kinky Freidman lives in Texas. Counts politicians among his friends.

And, since Kinky Friedman ran against Perry in 2006 ... You see how a good politician is the one who wins. (And, as Kinky said, "got saved from jumping off the bridge ... of his nose ... by his devastating loss.)

The comments are instructive. A bunch of commenters take the opportunity to say "fuck rick perry". One commenter raises a substantive issue with the premise of the post. It is the kind of the thing an Althouse commenter might write. The next commenter is confused: "am i late to the “fuck rick perry” potluck" she asks.

It is interesting that the liberal crowd sees the press "swooning over his manly manliness."

Althouse, of course, is well ahead of this meme, having spotted those who proclaim the governor's manly manliness as a springboard to disgust. Which is why this is Althouse.

14. The role relationships of man and woman find their fullest expression in the close union of marriage. In a Christian home a husband and wife are partners and co-heirs of God's gracious gift of salvation (Eph 5:22-33; 1 Pe 3:1-7).

15. Since God appointed the husband to be the head of the wife (Eph 5:23), the husband will love and care for his God-given wife (1 Pe 3:7). A wife will gladly accept the leadership of her husband as her God-appointed head (Eph 5:22-24).

16. As the head of the wife and family the husband has the prime responsibility for the spiritual instruction of the family (Eph 6:4).

In the Church

17. The biblical principle of role relationship applies also to the gatherings of the church. All believers, men and women, will participate at gatherings of worship, prayer, Bible study, and service. The scriptural applications that a woman remain silent (1 Co 14:34) and that a woman should not teach a man (1 Ti 2:11,12) require that a woman refrain from participating in these gatherings in any way which involves authority over men.

18. In church assemblies the headship principle means that only men will cast votes when such votes exercise authority over men. Only men will do work that involves authority over men (1 Co 11:3-10; 14:33-35; 1 Ti 2:11,12).

19. All Christians, men and women, are to use their God-given gifts to serve each other (1 Pe 4:10). Women are encouraged to participate in offices and activities of the public ministry except where the work involves authority over men.

In the World

20. Christians also accept the biblical role relationship principle for their life and work in the world (1 Co 11:3; Eph 5:6-17). Christians seek to do God's will consistently in every area of their lives. We will therefore strive to apply this role relationship principle to our life and work in the world.

21. Scripture leaves a great deal to our conscientious Christian judgment as we live the role relationship principle in the world. In Christian love we will refrain from unduly binding the consciences of the brothers and sisters in our fellowship. Rather, we will encourage each other as we seek to apply this principle to our lives in the world.

22. Because the unregenerate world is not motivated by the Gospel or guided by God's will (1 Co 2:14), we as Christians will not try to force God's will upon the world (1 Co 5:12). We will seek to influence and change the world by our Gospel witness in word and deed (Mk 16:15; Mt 5:16).

Sure, there are females who are manly, but that doesn't confuse me about what it is. We wouldn't say such a woman was "feminine" would we? And we know a feminine man when we see it. The men don't get all pissy and try to claim it's manly to be a pussy. Well, maybe the pussies do.

Althouse, we are all dumber now. Thanks.

The next time I write something stupid, it's your fault. Just remember that.

Oh shit, now I'm scared I might vote for Obama. I gotta stop coming here. I just got the overpowering desire to label my shoes "L" & "R". Or is it "R" & "L"? Dammmit!

What we call manly really strikes me as more "adultly" (though that sounds awful), as in, it represents standing up for what's right, being secure in who you are, protecting and providing for those who (legitimately) depend on you, being a good citizen in your community, etc.

This is at bottom an aesthetic question about what the manly virtues are and who displays the most excellence in them. Homer invites comparisons among Achilleus, Hector and Odysseus, with the former two showing excellence as warrior and prince, and the latter as a cunning and courageous man of the world.

These days we are more likely to hear of archetypes or stereotypes of manly behavior, rather than excellence per se.

Who is the more manly character in "Casablanca", Richard Blaine or Victor Laszlo? (I'll stipulate to Bogart being the more manly of the actors.)

The best definition of a "man" I ever heard (tho via backing into the subj) was given by the then head of Tulane's Law Library at happy hour at Robert's Bar in New Orleans circa 1995 when discussing the qualities of Geo. Washington: "In the history of our country he was not our greatest general, our finest agronomist, our bravest frontier surveyer or our most accomplished President--he was simply the best Man."

Would we be able to start right in on a discussion like this about women, or would we first have to deabte whther the criterion would be "most womanly" or "most feminine"? (Doesn't seem to be as much of a gap between "manly" and "masculine" does there?)

As judged from the article, local Idahoan support for said man is overwhelming, but that won't stop AG Eric Holder's Department of "Justice" from wasting court time prosecuting this (hopefully) unwinnable case.

Manliness is limited to delivering sperm? A post-manly definition of what it is to be a man.

Men are here to be husbands and fathers, leaders and followers, John Wayne and Jimmy Stewart. If I were going to define the most manly I would say that the person best suited to keeping his wife and children alive in a post-apocalyptic world is the manliest.

-Is he brave enough to fight when necessary?

-Is he wise enough to know when not to fight?

-Is he strong enough to split wood to keep the family warm all winter?

-Is he gentle enough to hold his children?

-Is he smart enough to build shelter?

-Is he faithful enough to stick around when the going gets tough?

Using this definition of manliness I would say we are shot out of luck with all of the candidates.

I think that the reason that the left is so obsessed about this is that they detect that one of the things that is so attractive about Perry is his masculinity and manliness. It seems almost visceral right now, his attraction by so many, and in particular in contrast to Obama.

Lyssa pointed out a big part of this - that he appears to be an adult, and that is what we need right now, is an adult to tell us what we need to do to get out of Obama's and the Democrats' mess. It is like we need a real man to make the hard choices and lead us in the hard work ahead.

Part of what is humorous though is that Palin is more manly, or at least participates in more manly endeavorers than does Obama.

Deconstructing a man into named pieces like interchangeable parts may appear rational, but it is as stupid as it gets.

Man happens to be endowed by his creator with certain authority.

It is the rebellion from exercising or submitting to that father's and husband's authority that tempts rational analysts to throw away the Man's role as the righteous authority over the earth and its animals (or as Carrol calls it, a mensch.)

"Manliness" is demonstrated by striving to achieve Aristotle's list of manly virtues:

- Courage is a means between the extremes of cowardice and foolhardiness with respect to the emotion of fear

- Temperance is a means between the the extremes of self-indulgence and insensibility with respect to the desire for pleasures of the body (eating, drinking, sex).

-Generosity (or liberality) is a means between the extremes of extravagance and stinginess with respect to the giving away and taking in of money. [an extravagant person is excessive in giving away , but defective in taking in money; a stingy person is defective in giving away money, but excessive in taking in it].

-Pride is a means between the extremes of vanity and excessive humility with respect to ones desire to receive great honors.

-Good temper is a means between the extremes of irascibility (or irritability) and apathy with respect to ones proneness to anger.

-Truthfulness is a means between the extremes of boastfulness and self-deprecation with respect to the way one presents oneself to others.

-Wittiness is a means between the buffoonery and boorishness with respect to ones desire to amuse others.

-Friendliness is a means between -obsequiousness (e.g., being overly deferential/groveling) and unpleasantness with respect to the desire to please others.

-Modesty is a means between the extremes of bashfulness and shamelessness with respect to one's susceptibility to shame.

-Righteous indignation is a means between envy and spite with respect to the pleasure and pain that one feels at the fortunes of one's neighbors [e.g., One who is righteously indignant is pained by the undeserved good/bad fortune of others, but is pleased by the deserved good/bad fortune of others; the envious person is pained good fortune of others, whether deserved or not; the spiteful person feels pleasure at the bad fortune of others, whether they deserve it or not]

XWL - currently sitting in NW. MT, 20 miles from the ID border, and a couple of hours from where the bear was shot. Got an article on it a day or two ago by a friend I visited Mon. who lives an hour south of there. It is a big thing up there. Big.

A couple of years ago, two two-time loser grizzlies were killed down river a half an hour by Noxon, one by a train, and other by a guy who fired when attacked. The feds hadn't mentioned that they were relocating problem bears there to the people around there, and he claimed that he thought that it was a black bear. Ended up getting prosecuted by the county and acquitted, if I remember right. Otherwise, he would have likely lost his right to protect himself the next time something like this happened.

In Missoula right now, the big stink is about a farmer killing wolves that had been attacking his goats. At least they aren't endangered any more.

It’s 2000 all over again: A Republican governor from Texas is running for president, and the press is swooning over his manly manliness.

That statement presumes (or conveniently leaves out) there was no 'swooning' (if that's a word) over the Obama swagger.. I recall somebody saying he felt a thrill going up his leg every time Obama spoke.

So would I support Rick Perry for president? Hell, yes! As the last nail that hasn’t been hammered down in this country, I agree with Rick that there are already too damn many laws, taxes, regulations, panels, committees, and bureaucrats. While Obama is busy putting the hyphen between “anal” and “retentive” Rick will be rolling up his sleeves and getting to work.

For more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/24/kinky-friedman-rick-perry-s-got-my-vote.html

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew) Tracking the First Lady's daily schedule, and the security detail of the President is seriously fucking creepy dude

REALLY, so when did that occur, 20 January 2009? I believe there were many stories about Bush and his trips to Crawford or the fact that he was usually out of the White House by early Friday afternoon, for Camp David? Was that creepy then?

Oh and you might want to talk the MSM who like(d) to talk about Michelle’s “toned arms” in such glowing terms. Seems you guyz like the attention when its adulatory, find it creepy when it’s not.

As I read this, I realized that, if I’d been asked ahead of time to guess which politician, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, or Jon [sic] Huntsley[sic], would be singled out for “manly manliness,”

Somewhere, John Huntsman -- the closest thing to a liberal manly man on the GOP side -- weeps in the arms of his frustrated wife over his inability to make an impression.

Tracking the First Lady's daily schedule, and the security detail of the President is seriously fucking creepy dude.

You do understand that this is information routinely made available, right bro? No one is hiding in hampers or digging through trash cans, cuz. Your type made the rules: Nancy Reagan buying new china with private funds was made a liberal outrage, and George W's vacation time was obsessed over...you made those issues, dude. Sucks, don't it, holmes?

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew) Creepy dude. I didn't get freaked out when the press said something nice about Laura Bush either. What is wrong with people

Would that be AFTER she wasn’t FLOTUS and discussed her disagreements with her husband’s party and before they discussed her manslaughter or accidental homicide story. And as to Michelle, it wasn’t “wingers” that extolled her sense of style, her being the new Jackie O, or her toned arms, it was YOUR side….Wasn’t my side that swooned over Obama’ “mobs”, nor my side that derided Bush’s 1.5 hour fitness routine…we really didn’t care, either way.

Finally, back to the topic, it wasn’t right wing news that covered Michelle, in Spain, was it? It’s not just the Free Republic camped out at Martha’s Vineyard or Hawai’I is it? Your problem is, someone is “totting” up the cost and talking about it.

If the prez wants to take his family along for the ride on AF1, no problem. That's not what people are carping about. Remember her trip to the Costa del Sol? Leaving 4 hours ahead of her husband for the latest trip to MV?

No one is saying that Bruce Springsteen, Conan O'Brien, or Fred Rogers aren't manly*. The claim that Rick Perry is more "manly" than these men has been invented by the person asking the question.

That's one of the big problems with contemporary American liberalism; they make shit up that has nothing to do with what anyone is actually thinking and then fight against it.

* Sinclair Sexsmith is another story entirely. Like many butch lesbians, she's essentially play acting, and if you really look at her public persona critically, it's more of a parody of manliness (and masculinity) than anything else. If she's trying to be manly, she's doing it wrong.

Still no response to the Klein/Palin creepiness question. What a surprise! And, sorry, but commenting on the FLOTUS vacation activities, which information is found in newspaper headlines, doesn't seem like "tracking".

Have we devolved to the point that "meatiness" or "macho" is the ultimate deciding characteristic for a President ? What about Abraham Lincoln? Wouldn't he be in trouble in a Manliness contest? I guess so. No way he would be judged manly enough to keep the Union together.

How about Ben Bernanke, is he macho enough? Or do we have different criteria for Fed chief, a lesser important person?

Roz Chatt asks: "What about Abraham Lincoln? Wouldn't he be in trouble in a Manliness contest? I guess so. No way he would be judged manly enough to keep the Union together."

I suspect that while Abraham Lincoln might not have seemed particularly "manly" in his time in a sense of the term meaning "beefy," "rough," "muscular," "tough," or so on, in today's environment, Lincoln would seem more manly than many of the presidential contenders by virtue of having grown up poor on the then-frontier where he would have had to regularly help with all sorts of tasks of rural life unknown to most city slickers today.

Here's a passage from an online article about Lincoln that talks about his youth on the frontier: "It was a wild region, with many bears and other wild animals still in the woods" wrote Lincoln in the Fell autobiography. More details are found in the sketch he furnished John L. Scripps. "He (Thomas Lincoln) settled in an unbroken forest, and this clearing away of the surplus wood was the great task ahead. Abraham, though very young was large of his age, and had an ax (axe) put into his hands at once: and from that till within his twenty-third year he was almost constantly handling that most useful instrument - less, of course, in plowing and harvesting seasons."

Needless to say, you definitely chose the wrong president to illustrate your point.

I like the lib who calls Perry an "Air Force pansy." Libs sure do hate them some military people. I wonder if that guy would be willing to tell the parents of the three airmen who were recently killed in the Chinook helicopter shoot down in Afghanistan that their sons were pansies.

"What about Abraham Lincoln? Wouldn't he be in trouble in a Manliness contest? I guess so."

Dude, what the hell are you talking about?

As a young man, President Lincoln hauled goods by flatboat, making him the mid-19th century equivalent of a long-haul trucker. Early in his political career, when one of his opponent's supporters rushed the podium and started a fight, Lincoln hurled him ten feet off of the stage, and then went right back to his speech!

Before entering politics, Lincoln was known better for his athleticism and physical prowess than anything else. He was an ace handball player and footracer, and he was also a veteran of the Black Hawk War. One of the most celebrated events in his early life was his wrestling match against the leader of a group of "regulators", the Clary's Grove Boys. Lincoln kicked the guy's ass handily, at which point the rest of the gang had to mob him in order to get him off of his feet.

Nobody thought that Lincoln was unmanly. In fact, when he famously ran against Senator Douglas, even Douglas had to acknowledge his physical prowess (the best example is in Douglas's opening remarks at the Ottawa debate).

In short, President Lincoln was famously manly, and even before the days of focus groups, political science degrees, and media handlers, everybody acknowledged that his physicality was key to his victory. (And physicality is, of course, closely associated with manliness.)

"I suspect that ... Abraham Lincoln might not have seemed particularly 'manly' in his time in a sense of the term meaning 'beefy,' 'rough,' 'muscular,' 'tough,' or so on..."

He was.

Actually, Lincoln's toughness was one of President Lincoln's key selling points. A lot was made of it and, even though he didn't smoke or drink, he was extremely popular with the rough-and-tumble set, who saw him as one of their own.

This is because he did stuff in his early days like throw a grown man from the stage when he tried to disrupt his speech.

People should not dis Fred Rogers. He was as manly a man as anyone I ever knew. He was kind, understanding, he really believed in what he was doing and he never hurt anybody. And one of the biggest tests of manhood is whether you can teach people things. I'd wager Fred Rogers taught more people more thing than anybody on this board, or probably on all the discussion boards and blogs on the internets put together.

The dude was a bit effeminate in some ways, and people take that to mean that he wasn't "manly". That's a huge mistake. He was, effeminate manner and all, a better example of a man than nearly any of the celebrities that our children worship today. Mel Gibson? Feh. Guy doesn't even know how to think. That Bieber kid? Empty head, nice vocal chords (for now). Justin Timberlake? Dude has no clue about hard decisions and hard times, and provides no example for anybody except maybe up-and-coming empty-headed celebrities.

Fred Rogers made a LOT of money, and he did it teaching children how to be better people. A lot of those children had Fred as a friend, and nobody else. My parents did foster care when I was a kid, and I know this to be a fact. The only friends some kids had back then were Fred Rogers and the Cookie Monster.

So let's leave Fred alone in the manliness department, m'kay? He was more of a man than I ever even hope to be, MUCH more of a man than anybody in the presidential race on either side, and so inhumanly much more of a man than anybody on this blog that it hurts just to have to point it out.

As for Lincoln: "He enjoyed the brief distinction his exhibitions of strength gave him more than the admiration of his friends for his literary or forensic efforts. Some of the feats attributed to him almost surpass belief. One witness declares he was equal to three men, having on a certain occasion carried a load of six hundred pounds. At another time he walked away with a pair of logs which three robust men were skeptical of their ability to carry. "He could strike with a maul a heavier blow - could sink an axe deeper into wood than any man I ever saw." is the testimony of another witness." from "Abraham Lincoln, the Physical Man" by Albert Kaplan.

As one born on Lincoln's birthday in IL, I was an avid reader of Lincoln stories. One of them was that he picked up single-handedly a 300+ pound chicken coop and moved it several yards for a neighbor. He suffered from acromegaly, which commonly comes with great strength, yet was renowned as a gentle man.

Fred Rogers was manly, but in a very particular way; namely, he demonstrated the virtues of fortitude, persistence, and integrity.

Here you have a man who unquestionably lacked a stereotypically macho appearance and delivery. There was nothing about him that shouted "star" or "celebrity."

What did he do?

He realized there was a need for young children to have a safe, tame, healthy, welcoming environment in a T.V. show.

He decided that it would be lame for men to leave providing this up to women, just because it wasn't "cool." He decided it needed doing, so he decided to do it.

He said, "I went into television because I hated it so, and I thought there was some way of using this fabulous instrument to be of nurture to those who would watch and listen."

So he took it upon himself to make the show, without regard to how uncool it made him look. And he stuck to his convictions for over thirty years.

When a fast-food firm created a character imitating him to pitch fast food to children, Fred Rogers calmly but firmly indicated that he had not approved it and that he thought the misuse of his likeness confusing for children; the company apologized and pulled the ad.

When Eddie Murphy created "Mr. Robinson's Neighborhood," Fred Rogers actually found it "amusing and affectionate" though he noted it was better that it be broadcast late at night when his usual audience of children would not see it.

Anyway, this was his personal crusade; he started it, made it work, and did it for decades, practically until he died.

Beyond that, he married his wife in 1952, and remained faithful to her until he died. They had two sons and two grandsons (and a third on the way) when Mr. Rogers died in 2003.

The guy was not a testosterone exuding lunk, but he was a good man, a man of conviction and integrity, and a hero.

Fred Rogers may have worn wimpy Carteresque sweater cardigans on camera, but it took a real man to play make-believe with children he seemed to genuinely love (although, truth be told, his 'hood characters always creeped me out.)

How sad it is that these days "Won't You Be My Neighbor" is more about googling for sex offenders per Megan's Law.

Fred Rogers exhibited great manliness in WWII. He was Lee Marvin's commanding officer and according to Marvin was the bravest man he ever saw. marvin himself was a decorated war veteran, winning the purple heart.

My parents did foster care when I was a kid, and I know this to be a fact. The only friends some kids had back then were Fred Rogers and the Cookie Monster.

Dude, you can't tell some of these people anything. As a former foster child (is anybody EVER a "former foster child"?) I can say many folks online are just the typical mean kids, looking for an opening, waiting to do damage. They know no more about manliness than adulthood or kindness. Virtue itself is lacking in many of them. Having a background in foster care - knowing what the world is like when you're truly alone in it - that'll teach you something. And it has nothing to do with that most-cherished of internet commodities, ironic snark.

Real men know it's important to care, and yes, Fred Rogers was a fine example of the kind.

P.S.

That we've moved from machismo being what many thought was an obvious punchline to a sign of leadership is, for me, about as exciting as it can get.

I checked out the original post. Great arguments, I admit, especially concerning Perry's willingness to execute people. But I was a little confused; was that was supposed to be an argument AGAINST Perry??

I foresee a future in which we are forced to perform homosexual acts ..A man was busy and nervous prepearing his luggage. Someone asked why he was is such a hurry.He answered:When i was young homosexuality was fordidden. Then the law was nullified but people still saw them as inmoral. Then people began tolerating them.Now, the can marry each other..well, im going out before it is made mandatory

Fred Rogers was a decorated war hero and a Presbyterian minister. When Johnny Carson tried to talk to Lee Marvin about his wartime heroism, Lee Marvin told Johnny about a man he considered a real hero: Fred Rogers. Mr. Rogers wore long sleeves to hide his tattoos.

I appreciate the biographical review and rebuke regarding A. Lincoln. I knew that info once, but I had forgotten. If only we could find more men and women like him in public life -- I know I would feel more hopeful.

What has our culture produced and become that our politicians fill us with contempt rather than admiration?

"I find it incredibly funny to read the tear-soaked anti-Perry posts from the wussy-woo metrosexual males here. I bet you all wear helmets when you ride your bikes. Face it–you really don’t hate Perry, you’re just jealous! You’d gladly give a testicle to be half the man he is. Or half the man Sarah Palin is.

Actually, you’d probably give both testicles. You don’t use them, do you?"